John Posted July 23, 2012 Report Share Posted July 23, 2012 but i NEED my 64 ounces of soda. im nowhere near fat enough yet. plus, i still have a few of my original teeth left that have not rotted away from drinking nothing but mountain dew... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flounder Posted July 23, 2012 Report Share Posted July 23, 2012 I'm completely serious. you don't cure a disease by treating the symptoms. sorry but no one needs a gun in the 21st century. our country isn't on the boarder of Afghanistan or someplace that warrants you needing a gun for defense. if you're that worried about someone breaking in your house buy an alarm or a dog or learn how to fight. there's many places all over to learn how to defend yourself. and you'll get some exercise. military or law enforcment sure. but not john q public.I know this forum is a huge 2nd amendment rights advocate but you guys have 0 use for a gun other than it's a hobby. that's not "needing" a gun. you just "want" a gun. I had guns myself and do find it fun to blast shit and target shoot. but honestly, that's all a gun's use is to normal sane people. the problem is anyone can get one because you and I can. that's the problem. if this was a case about drugs whatever drug he was on none of you would have issues with it being banned.You dont need a bike either so sell it before you start talking BS. Its not about need, its about right and ability just like you with your bike. The bad people will always have weapons, their is just no getting around that in this day and age so what you effectively just said was "Only criminals should have firearms because we should take it from the general population" Youre not thinking before you speak. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magley64 Posted July 23, 2012 Report Share Posted July 23, 2012 (edited) You dont need a bike either so sell it before you start talking BS. Its not about need, its about right and ability just like you with your bike. The bad people will always have weapons, their is just no getting around that in this day and age so what you effectively just said was "Only criminals should have firearms because we should take it from the general population" Youre not thinking before you speak.to be fair,those that support the outlawing of guns also generally support the means necessary to enforce such a ban. this would halt gun sales, gun manufacturing, and the confiscation of any guns on sight...It isn't just "all honest people, turn in your guns now" it's more in-depth than that.It certainly wouldn't be easy, but if every law abiding citizen honestly wanted guns to be outlawed, it could be done. we could have a gunshot death rate less than that of great Britain in no time at all.You could list off any number of things that are currently illegal that "only criminals posses" it doesn't mean that it's a good idea for everyone on your block to have one. Legalizing only gives the criminals a more easily accessible supply line than they would otherwise have.if we legalized civilian nuclear weapons for example, would that make us safer? Edited July 23, 2012 by magley64 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bad324 Posted July 23, 2012 Report Share Posted July 23, 2012 to be fair,those that support the outlawing of guns also generally support the means necessary to enforce such a ban. this would halt gun sales, gun manufacturing, and the confiscation of any guns on sight...and those same people are probably bitching that there are no jobs and sucking off the government tit. I'd love to see just how many jobs are lost to such a ban. I can't even being to throw out a number to guess...hundreds of thousands maybe? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Butters Posted July 23, 2012 Report Share Posted July 23, 2012 to be fair,those that support the outlawing of guns also generally support the means necessary to enforce such a ban. this would halt gun sales, gun manufacturing, and the confiscation of any guns on sight...It isn't just "all honest people, turn in your guns now" it's more in-depth than that.It certainly wouldn't be easy, but if every law abiding citizen honestly wanted guns to be outlawed, it could be done. we could have a gunshot death rate less than that of great Britain in no time at all.it must be so nice to live in such a naive and perfect world as you do inside your head. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magley64 Posted July 23, 2012 Report Share Posted July 23, 2012 I'm not speculating on the effects, nor am I supporting such an endeavor... I'm just saying that if it were to be done, it could be done fairly effectively if everyone cooperated. I'm usually on the side of personal liberty (as i am in this case), but I do see both sides of this issue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magley64 Posted July 23, 2012 Report Share Posted July 23, 2012 (edited) it must be so nice to live in such a naive and perfect world as you do inside your head.yeah, I give the human race more credit than they are due most of the time, I prefer to be optimistic and disappointed than pessimistic and right.FTR, I do live in a world outside of my head, as well... and only rarely do they not reconcile... Edited July 23, 2012 by magley64 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bad324 Posted July 23, 2012 Report Share Posted July 23, 2012 oh i know, and I'm just stating the hypocrisy and lack of foresight on that side of the fence Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DirtDee675 Posted July 23, 2012 Report Share Posted July 23, 2012 you're being very irrational. what do you hunt in the middle of a city anyway? for thousands of years people hunted with everything but a gun. you don't need a gun to survive. sorry but that argument has no merrit. if anything it just proves we should improve our disaster response efforts.without a gun there's no way he could have killed all these people. most he could have done is stab a few people. besides, I didn't read about some CCW person stopping anyone from doing something like this EVER.name the last time any of you actually needed a gun to defend yourself. your chances of being struck by lightning are much higher. sorry but if they ever put a vote up for banning gun sales/manufacturing in the usa I'm voting for it. it's the only way to stop these morons from getting their hands on one. because someone is putting guns in the hands of criminals in the first place. then you got legit stores selling guns to whoever walks through the door. these things are not a toy any random moron should be allowed to buy. fuck sake we make people go through drivers ed to drive a car. why not make it a dreadful pain in the ass to get a gun at least. YOU gun loving bible thumping 2nd amendment nuts ENABLE criminals to have guns and shoot people with them.Holy shit. You live in a bubble dude, open your eyes. Also to address your 16oz soda ban statement, I'm in New York right now and you can buy a 20oz bottle anywhere. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Posted July 23, 2012 Report Share Posted July 23, 2012 (edited) without a gun there's no way he could have killed all these people. most he could have done is stab a few people.this dude begs to differ. he killed 168 people with no gun. Edited July 23, 2012 by John 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReconRat Posted July 23, 2012 Report Share Posted July 23, 2012 ...but if every law abiding citizen honestly wanted guns to be outlawed, it could be done... if all wanted guns outlawed... they wouldn't have any guns in the first place? I'd think...Oh wait, they don't but the criminals do. Yeah... outlaw them, that will work....if we legalized civilian nuclear weapons for example, would that make us safer?I like it. Miniature short range tactical nano-nukes the size of a BB. Nobody would mess with nobody. In fear of a 6 foot mushroom cloud and a 2 foot radius of vaporization. Works for me. We could use slingshots.edit: btw, now do we take away all the guns in sight, if we don't have police with guns? No exceptions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magley64 Posted July 23, 2012 Report Share Posted July 23, 2012 I like it. Miniature short range tactical nano-nukes the size of a BB. Nobody would mess with nobody. In fear of a 6 foot mushroom cloud and a 2 foot radius of vaporization. Works for me. We could use slingshots.no no, I mean full size nuclear missiles, after all it's not the fault of the tool, it's the person... that is your POV, right?It's a good idea to allow the general public to buy whatever weapons they want, right? Why not give the public the power to level a city? Can't blame the nukes, it's the bombers fault...It's all well and good to talk about personal responsibility, but eventually you get to a level of collateral damage that it becomes the responsibility of everybody.Clearly we don't all agree what that level of collateral damage is... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CleaveTheGreat Posted July 23, 2012 Report Share Posted July 23, 2012 It certainly wouldn't be easy, but if every law abiding citizen honestly wanted guns to be outlawed, it could be done. we could have a gunshot death rate less than that of great Britain in no time at all.And all the millions of guns that have already been produced would be floating around amongst all the criminals. Good plan. Also, with a population 5x greater than the UK, I highly doubt we will ever have a gunshot death rate lower than theirs regardless of whether or not we ban guns. It's due to this really complicated thing called math. Look around the world and compare the gunshot death rate with ours and factor in population - it becomes pretty clear that gun control does not work and will not make you safer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Posted July 23, 2012 Report Share Posted July 23, 2012 there is a way to factor in population. it's called "per capita". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magley64 Posted July 23, 2012 Report Share Posted July 23, 2012 And all the millions of guns that have already been produced would be floating around amongst all the criminals. Good plan. Also, with a population 5x greater than the UK, I highly doubt we will ever have a gunshot death rate lower than theirs regardless of whether or not we ban guns. It's due to this really complicated thing called math. Look around the world and compare the gunshot death rate with ours and factor in population - it becomes pretty clear that gun control does not work and will not make you safer.actually, we're definitely much higher, even adjusted for population...I'm not saying it would be easy, or instant. If it were a priority, it could be done.I'm not looking to be safer... I'm not proposing we do it... I'm simply stating the fact that as Americans, there is very little that we cannot accomplish if we set our collective minds to do it.The problem comes with doubters, cynics, and the ever popular critic, intentionally injecting their negativity into the clockwork, slowing down and stopping progress.Maybe you don't believe in this country, but I do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disclaimer Posted July 23, 2012 Report Share Posted July 23, 2012 there is a way to factor in population. it's called "per capita".As in, there is a high rate of stupid "per capita" on ORDN. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CleaveTheGreat Posted July 23, 2012 Report Share Posted July 23, 2012 there is a way to factor in population. it's called "per capita".I know what per capita is. It's typically used to meausre income or gdp. I haven't been able to find much data on "gunshots per capita" unfortunately. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Posted July 23, 2012 Report Share Posted July 23, 2012 As in, there is a high rate of stupid "per capita" on ORDN.lol aint that the truth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magley64 Posted July 23, 2012 Report Share Posted July 23, 2012 (edited) I know what per capita is. It's typically used to meausre income or gdp. I haven't been able to find much data on "gunshots per capita" unfortunately.very hard to findhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rateI sorted by homicide, intentional suicide probably shouldn't factor in too much in this debate... Edited July 23, 2012 by magley64 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Posted July 23, 2012 Report Share Posted July 23, 2012 I know what per capita is. It's typically used to meausre income or gdp. I haven't been able to find much data on "gunshots per capita" unfortunately.here's one to start... granted it is about 15 years old now. still has good info in it though.http://ije.oxfordjournals.org/content/27/2/214.full.pdf Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CleaveTheGreat Posted July 23, 2012 Report Share Posted July 23, 2012 actually, we're definitely much higher, even adjusted for population...I'm not saying it would be easy, or instant. If it were a priority, it could be done.I'm not looking to be safer... I'm not proposing we do it... I'm simply stating the fact that as Americans, there is very little that we cannot accomplish if we set our collective minds to do it.The problem comes with doubters, cynics, and the ever popular critic, intentionally injecting their negativity into the clockwork, slowing down and stopping progress.Maybe you don't believe in this country, but I do.Well I guess I'll have to double check the data then. Maybe I'm wrong.I agree that we can accomplish a lot but maybe we should focus on accomplishing things that would actually be beneficial.But how does wanting to preserve the second amendment equate to not believing in this country? Not seeing the connection there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C-bus Posted July 23, 2012 Report Share Posted July 23, 2012 Also.... why I gotta be bible-thumper to care about constitutional rights? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CleaveTheGreat Posted July 23, 2012 Report Share Posted July 23, 2012 very hard to findhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rateI sorted by homicide, intentional suicide probably shouldn't factor in too much in this debate...This was the only one I saw but I have a hard time trusting anything that comes from wikipedia.here's one to start... granted it is about 15 years old now. still has good info in it though.http://ije.oxfordjournals.org/content/27/2/214.full.pdfThis is what I was looking for. I'm not afraid to admit when I'm wrong and I stand corrected. Still does not change the fact that banning guns is a terrible idea will not solve America's crime problems. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magley64 Posted July 23, 2012 Report Share Posted July 23, 2012 But how does wanting to preserve the second amendment equate to not believing in this country? Not seeing the connection there.deciding whether or not we "should" is fine. We could argue over the merits of removing guns from a peaceful society all day long... It seemed more in your post that you were saying "it's too hard, we could never get that done, it would be a big mess" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C-bus Posted July 23, 2012 Report Share Posted July 23, 2012 The Bill of Rights is to protect us from government. Period. Not from crime, not for food, not to keep us safe..... to protect us from tyranny. And we're heading there bit by bit.... being led by both political parties. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.